Both the reading and the lecture discuss about Rembrandt. While the reading states that there are some doubts if he has painted a certain portrait, The lecture cast doubts this idea by saying that there are various evidence that clarify this controversy.
First of all, The reading passage claims that Rembrandt, who cares about the details of his works, would never paint a portrait with such as inconsistency in the clothes as it is viewed in the portrait of the woman. The professor counters this idea by saying that some scientist have discovered that there was an extra layer of hue painted over the original; therefore, the paint was altered. Moreover, the posible purpose of this change in the original portrait was likely because someone wanted to increase the value of this piece of art.
Secondly, the reading passage asserts that Rembrandt cared much about the light and shadow so he should never make a mistake in the illumination of the portrait. The professor opposes to that explanation by saying that because of the addition of the new layer of color ,the paint looked different from the original. Furthermore, the scientist discovered that the original painting use light and shadow that was more realistic.
Finally, the reading passage says that Rembrandt never used panels of portraits that was made by several pieces of wood glued together.However, The professor points out that the addition of several pieces of wood was made in order to make it looks bigger.In addition to this , the professor expresses that the portrait of the woman used the same wood as other works of Rembrand supporting the idea that the portrait of the woman was a creation of him.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 99, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ho cares about the details of his works, would never paint a portrait with such a...
^^
Line 3, column 404, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...refore, the paint was altered. Moreover, the posible purpose of this change in th...
^^
Line 5, column 269, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...f the addition of the new layer of color ,the paint looked different from the orig...
^^
Line 7, column 136, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...y several pieces of wood glued together.However, The professor points out that the addi...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 256, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: In
...s made in order to make it looks bigger.In addition to this , the professor expres...
^^
Line 7, column 275, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...make it looks bigger.In addition to this , the professor expresses that the portra...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in addition, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1406.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 282.0 270.72406181 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98581560284 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57819803265 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489361702128 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 426.6 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 103.760407778 49.2860985944 211% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 156.222222222 110.228320801 142% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.3333333333 21.698381199 144% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.6666666667 7.06452816374 208% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.37247960745 0.272083759551 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.156908230712 0.0996497079465 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0595413641841 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232976849844 0.162205337803 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0608811465865 0.0443174109184 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.3589403974 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.47 53.8541721854 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.